After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Just because marriage is brought about by the courts doesn't mean Republicans will be less homophobic than they are now. This is an asinine proposition that "all gay white men" would all of a sudden be fine with the knuckle-dragging Republicans.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Benvolio

Some will just as many already are. Since liberals, such as opinterph, have become anti white, fewer whites will feel comfortable voting democrat.

I thought you had disappeared to shy away from the impending accountability of the immigration topic debacle you were responsible for. A tactic often used by a few "conservatives" on here. However, I see you've decided to expedite that process by violating the CoC in specifically calling out and baiting another forum member, in particular a JUB administrator, as an "anti-white liberal."

After a long-hard fight for civil rights, we will reach an age of complacency within the gay community that will have never known the struggles that we faced. The Republicans will capitalize on homosexual talent that they had long oppressed, and there will be token gay men who will believe they are loved and accepted.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Just_Believe18

I thought you had disappeared to shy away from the impending accountability of the immigration topic debacle you were responsible for. A tactic often used by a few "conservatives" on here. However, I see you've decided to expedite that process by violating the CoC in specifically calling out and baiting another forum member, in particular a JUB administrator, as an "anti-white liberal."

After a long-hard fight for civil rights, we will reach an age of complacency within the gay community that will have never known the struggles that we faced. The Republicans will capitalize on homosexual talent that they had long oppressed, and there will be token gay men who will believe they are loved and accepted.

No I have generally avoided the forum because openterph changed the rules effectively prohibiting opposition to immigration on any basis, and effectively prohibiting patriotism, and any discussion of cultural differences. It is difficult to see how anything favorable can safely be said about America or Americans. Of course anything favorable to whites or western civilization is prohibited.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by nyctopgam

What do you think?

“Ask yourself, ‘Are members of the LGBT community better off now than they were four (or six) years ago? Is it easier for them to serve openly in the US military than it was four years ago? Are LGBT citizens still subject to codified discrimination by the federal government under the ruse of defending traditional marriage? Has marriage equality increased among the various states during the past four (or six) years and is it now more, or less, likely that LGBT citizens will soon enjoy true parity on that issue than it was four (or six) years ago?

Originally Posted by nyctopgam

Will [some] gay white men become Republican?

I suppose the answer may depend upon the extent to which those individuals pay attention to things that matter.

Originally Posted by Benvolio

[opinterph] changed the rules effectively prohibiting opposition to immigration on any basis, and effectively prohibiting patriotism, and any discussion of cultural differences. It is difficult to see how anything favorable can safely be said about America or Americans …

Check your compass, Dude.

Originally Posted by opinterph

The “new” policy does not prevent reasonable, fact-based discussions that are presented objectively with appropriate source documentation and without negative intent or effect.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

It is my opinion that if they continue to follow the current path the party is taking, by the time Marriage Equality is achieved, there may be no republican party. We do have a multi party system in the U.S., not a two party system. The party of no might just become the party that is no more.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by benvolio

some will just as many already are. Since liberals, such as opinterph, have become anti white, fewer whites will feel comfortable voting democrat.

wtf???

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Benvolio

No I have generally avoided the forum because openterph changed the rules effectively prohibiting opposition to immigration on any basis, and effectively prohibiting patriotism, and any discussion of cultural differences. It is difficult to see how anything favorable can safely be said about America or Americans. Of course anything favorable to whites or western civilization is prohibited.

I see four lies here. Anyone find more?

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Benvolio

Any opposition to immigration, is by definition, with negative intent, and therefore prohibited, dude.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by cm98059

It is my opinion that if they continue to follow the current path the party is taking, by the time Marriage Equality is achieved, there may be no republican party. We do have a multi party system in the U.S., not a two party system. The party of no might just become the party that is no more.

I disagree most emphatically.

America has a two party system. Period. Republicans could advocate genocide, demand the culling of the bottom 33% of income-earners, and propose to start another world war. They would still get 45% of the vote.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Benvolio

No I have generally avoided the forum because openterph changed the rules effectively prohibiting opposition to immigration on any basis, and effectively prohibiting patriotism, and any discussion of cultural differences. It is difficult to see how anything favorable can safely be said about America or Americans. Of course anything favorable to whites or western civilization is prohibited.

Bullshit.

But if having to actually prove and substantiate the baseless and racist opinions you've been spewing on this forum for the last few years is too much for you and it keeps your toxic opinions confined to the Stormfront site.....then all the better.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Benvolio

Any opposition to immigration, is by definition, with negative intent, and therefore prohibited, dude.

No, it's not, because it was opinterph himself who started the thread to open up the discussion about immigration to both sides. Your problem is that you failed to provide consistently legitimate sources, denigrated immigrant populations by race, and was unable to answer rebuttal questions from other forum members who disagreed with you. Instead, you presented biased and questionable sources, ignored debatable responses from forum members, and insulted them with labels like, "you liberals <insert insult."

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Is it just my impression, or does the question suggest that all white men are racists?

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Just_Believe18

No, it's not, because it was opinterph himself who started the thread to open up the discussion about immigration to both sides. Your problem is that you failed to provide consistently legitimate sources, denigrated immigrant populations by race, and was unable to answer rebuttal questions from other forum members who disagreed with you. Instead, you presented biased and questionable sources, ignored debatable responses from forum members, and insulted them with labels like, "you liberals <insert insult."

Nope. "Opposition" is by definition " negative in intent". Of course my criticism of immigration is "negative in intent".

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Benvolio

Nope. "Opposition" is by definition " negative in intent". Of course my criticism of immigration is "negative in intent".

This statement makes me doubt you have much more education than a GED, unless you went to some dirt-cheap community college.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by TX-Beau

It also implies all gay men are white.

No, just the important ones.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by T-Rexx

I disagree most emphatically.

America has a two party system. Period. Republicans could advocate genocide, demand the culling of the bottom 33% of income-earners, and propose to start another world war. They would still get 45% of the vote.

You can disagree all you want, but some founding fathers did not want political parties.
George Washington:

“I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally."

John Adams said:

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."

There is no mention of political parties in the constitution. Political parties did not emerge until George Washington's first term. And he advised against them. So, the United States is not a two party system. We can and should vote for the person who, in our own opinion, is the best candidate for the position. Over time, throughout the history of the United States, the political parties in power have changed. And if you have any doubts about that, ask your self when was the last time you saw a Whig party or a Federalist Party candidate.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by cm98059

George Washington:

“I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally."

John Adams said:

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."

It's an uphill battle against human nature to try to not have political parties. Forming into cliques comes naturally to most people, and in a way that's really all that political parties are.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

It remains true that the best predictor of what a candidate will do is his party affiliation. Candidates will say almost anything to get elected, so there is a major fallacy in thinking that you will vote for the best person.
Our two parties represent basic psychological differences among people, for or against the established culture. It is avoidable only by dishonest elections, as in Chicago.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by cm98059

You can disagree all you want, but some founding fathers did not want political parties.
George Washington:

“I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally."

John Adams said:

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."

There is no mention of political parties in the constitution. Political parties did not emerge until George Washington's first term. And he advised against them. So, the United States is not a two party system. We can and should vote for the person who, in our own opinion, is the best candidate for the position. Over time, throughout the history of the United States, the political parties in power have changed. And if you have any doubts about that, ask your self when was the last time you saw a Whig party or a Federalist Party candidate.

As Kuli notes, collective affinities and tribes are almost an inevitability.

It is one of the great ironies that Libertarians end up belonging to a collective called 'Libertarians'.

Humans band together to accomplish common goals.

The pity is that the US has become so mired in a single party system (one party - two branches - all owned by the same interests) that the Republic has reached a virtual point of stasis.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by cm98059

This is true, but what is even more pitiful, is that so many citizens of the United States have decided to accept the two party system kool aid.

The two party system is inevitable where the President is elected, as opposed to being selected by a parliament. This is because a third party ends up helping the candidate it likes least. Nader supporters helped elect Bush, Perot voters elected Clinton twice. Teddy Roosevelt elected Wilson.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by cm98059

This is true, but what is even more pitiful, is that so many citizens of the United States have decided to accept the two party system kool aid.

Civics courses in middle schools and high schools for decades taught that we have a two-party system. A lot of people think it's in the Constitution. The Constitution tried to avoid parties, but that foundered on the fact that vice presidents not selected by the president could and did work against the president.

People also tend to think that congressional districts are in the Constitution, but they aren't. Voting by party, instead of by candidate, is not inconsistent with the Constitution, and would certainly give us more congresscritters who would actually represent the people. If we don't switch to that, the effective one-party system we have is just going to get worse, and our march toward corporate feudalism will continue.

Last edited by Kulindahr; May 31st, 2014 at 06:10 PM.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Benvolio

The two party system is inevitable where the President is elected, as opposed to being selected by a parliament. This is because a third party ends up helping the candidate it likes least. Nader supporters helped elect Bush, Perot voters elected Clinton twice. Teddy Roosevelt elected Wilson.

We'd be better off if the people didn't vote for the president at all. First fix the representation issue, so we have multiple parties, then give each governor and each US senator a vote, and for the rest go back to voting for delegates to the Electoral College.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Kulindahr

We'd be better off if the people didn't vote for the president at all. First fix the representation issue, so we have multiple parties, then give each governor and each US senator a vote, and for the rest go back to voting for delegates to the Electoral College.

If we eliminated the electoral college altogether, that would go a long way to fixing the problem. The electoral college has never been a good idea, but with telephone, internet, cellular service like we have today, it is completely unnecessary, the popular vote is recorded in days if not hours after the election. Voter fraud is almost non-existent. It would almost be possible to conduct elections via the internet and have instantaneous results with our current internet capabilities. Your user name and password could be assigned to you when you register to vote, and you would need to have those to log into the polling place to cast your ballot. Eliminate all contributions to candidates, make $5.00 of everyone's income tax go into a fund that is distributed to all the candidates running for election, and that is their budget for their entire campaign. These would go a long way to leveling the playing field, and would give us a lot fairer elections.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by cm98059

So, the United States is not a two party system.

Over time, throughout the history of the United States, the political parties in power have changed. And if you have any doubts about that, ask your self when was the last time you saw a Whig party or a Federalist Party candidate.

We have had a Republican/Democratic two party system for the last 161 years.

Before that, we had a Whig/Democratic two party system for 20 years. (The Republican Party was founded by Whigs, so you could regard the status quo as ~181 years old).

Before that, we had a Federalist/Democratic two party system for 30 years.

What is it about this history that you do not regard as a two party system?

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Let me start off by saying that "opposition" is not inherently "negative in intent", it simply provides the dissenting viewpoint. As for my opinion on immigration, people arriving illegally should get no special amnesty and should be subject to the law, just as any other American is, and face deportation.

Now, back to the subject. I side with liberals on social issues and conservatives on economic issues. If Republicans weren't so insistent upon imposing their religion-based dogma upon the entirety of America, I would almost surely see myself as a conservative. However, this seems hard to imagine, seeing as religion is especially slow to die out in America. Once all the old-hat bigoted Republicans die out, there will probably be a noticeable increase of supporters to the right-wing agenda just accounted for by moderates who don't have as much of a reason to hate them.

Economically speaking, the conservatives know what they're doing. The "tax heavy, spend heavy" liberal agenda is conducive to growing an already bloated economy that could honestly lose a couple notches. Without technological advancement maintaining its mind-boggling rate, such an economical agenda leads to higher inflation rates and less real worth, making it even harder to pay off our national deficit (although I'm of the opinion that it never will be paid off).

America discerns itself by being the nation of people who believe in equal economic opportunity, not economic equality. I know my opinion on this matter tends to be very unpopular, but here it is anyhow. Conservatives have it right when they want to cut federal programs. It incentivizes the entrepreneurial spirit that seems to have been gradually declining over the past 50 years. This decline is partly due to subconscious placation (i.e. fluoridation of drinking water) and the growing empathy toward minority groups encouraged by liberals. Minorities need to stop making excuses for their apparent inability to climb the ranks; poor people need to help themselves out; but firstly, Americans as a whole must fight the cause of unemployment: minimum wage. That McDonalds protest seeking $15/hr was pure bullshit. I wouldn't advocate for the demolition of minimum wage, but rather placing it just below the market equilibrium level, just so as not to encourage wage levels similar to those of factory workers overseas. This will allow more people to get jobs and incite a surge in entrepreneurship.

Citing these merits to the Republican economic agenda, any educated person not biased by "it's-not-your-fault-minorities-so-vote-for-us" politics can clearly see the benefits to a low-tax, low-spending gov. So when all the conservative bigots die out and religion is inevitably proven to be a farce by discoveries in the field of quantum-physics, I'd most strongly consider joining the Republican party (if the Democratic party won't have died out and been replaced by a better one).

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by fftwink18

Let me start off by saying that "opposition" is not inherently "negative in intent", it simply provides the dissenting viewpoint. As for my opinion on immigration, people arriving illegally should get no special amnesty and should be subject to the law, just as any other American is, and face deportation.

Now, back to the subject. I side with liberals on social issues and conservatives on economic issues. If Republicans weren't so insistent upon imposing their religion-based dogma upon the entirety of America, I would almost surely see myself as a conservative. However, this seems hard to imagine, seeing as religion is especially slow to die out in America. Once all the old-hat bigoted Republicans die out, there will probably be a noticeable increase of supporters to the right-wing agenda just accounted for by moderates who don't have as much of a reason to hate them.

Economically speaking, the conservatives know what they're doing. The "tax heavy, spend heavy" liberal agenda is conducive to growing an already bloated economy that could honestly lose a couple notches. Without technological advancement maintaining its mind-boggling rate, such an economical agenda leads to higher inflation rates and less real worth, making it even harder to pay off our national deficit (although I'm of the opinion that it never will be paid off).

America discerns itself by being the nation of people who believe in equal economic opportunity, not economic equality. I know my opinion on this matter tends to be very unpopular, but here it is anyhow. Conservatives have it right when they want to cut federal programs. It incentivizes the entrepreneurial spirit that seems to have been gradually declining over the past 50 years. This decline is partly due to subconscious placation (i.e. fluoridation of drinking water) and the growing empathy toward minority groups encouraged by liberals. Minorities need to stop making excuses for their apparent inability to climb the ranks; poor people need to help themselves out; but firstly, Americans as a whole must fight the cause of unemployment: minimum wage. That McDonalds protest seeking $15/hr was pure bullshit. I wouldn't advocate for the demolition of minimum wage, but rather placing it just below the market equilibrium level, just so as not to encourage wage levels similar to those of factory workers overseas. This will allow more people to get jobs and incite a surge in entrepreneurship.

Citing these merits to the Republican economic agenda, any educated person not biased by "it's-not-your-fault-minorities-so-vote-for-us" politics can clearly see the benefits to a low-tax, low-spending gov. So when all the conservative bigots die out and religion is inevitably proven to be a farce by discoveries in the field of quantum-physics, I'd most strongly consider joining the Republican party (if the Democratic party won't have died out and been replaced by a better one).

So basically you don't "side with liberals on social issues" in the least little bit, and are just another whining fact free 'pub who doesn't actually know anything about "Liberalism" or 'liberalism" that wasn't derived from right wing propaganda.

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by cm98059

If we eliminated the electoral college altogether, that would go a long way to fixing the problem. The electoral college has never been a good idea, but with telephone, internet, cellular service like we have today, it is completely unnecessary, the popular vote is recorded in days if not hours after the election. Voter fraud is almost non-existent. It would almost be possible to conduct elections via the internet and have instantaneous results with our current internet capabilities. Your user name and password could be assigned to you when you register to vote, and you would need to have those to log into the polling place to cast your ballot. Eliminate all contributions to candidates, make $5.00 of everyone's income tax go into a fund that is distributed to all the candidates running for election, and that is their budget for their entire campaign. These would go a long way to leveling the playing field, and would give us a lot fairer elections.

Eliminate the popular vote, not the Electoral College. If you want to tinker with the E.C., the thing to do would be set a cap on how many votes the bigger states get.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

If by "conservatives" you mean the GOP, you're wrong on two counts: they aren't conservatives but reactionaries; and no, they don't know what they're doing.

Originally Posted by fftwink18

Citing these merits to the Republican economic agenda, any educated person ... can clearly see the benefits to a low-tax, low-spending gov.

In these days of vulture and Darwinistic capitalism, government is needed as a counterbalance to the plutocrats, to keep us from going into corporate feudalism. Part of the balance is a higher tax rate on the wealthy, which is only just because the whole structure of capitalism inherently moves money up the economic ladder.

Besides that, it's been learned that a basic level of health care for all is actually beneficial to the economy -- and that's inevitably going to require some tax subsidy.

The interesting thing about you assertion here is that when I first came to JUB, I would have agreed with it. But in the process of looking at the arguments about the Bush tax cuts, and debating the Laffer Curve, and more, I've become much moire educated about economics and taxation -- and as a result, I cannot agree with your assertion.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

In the 1960's and 1970's, taxes were a lot higher than they are today, with the top tax rates as high as 94%. From 1935 to 1981, the highest tax brackets were over 70% of income. Today we're being told that tax rates over thirty some percent of income are too high? When in effect, the middle class has not had an effective pay raise since the mid 1970's due to inflation out pacing pay raises. But that really is not the subject of this thread. The thread is about whether or not we think more of the glbt community will vote republican after marriage equality is the law of the land in the United States. And to that end, I can only reply No I do not think it will. After the civil rights movement of the 1960's did more African Americans vote republican? Did more Latino's vote republican?

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Of course they will. Once homosexuality becomes "accepted", those who fit the mold of what society upholds as ideal, will have no reason to side with progressive issues. The power of WASP privilege should never be underestimated, and when people stop facing rejection from their coevals and start being seen as merely one more within a group of socially favoured individuals, many will see no reason for showing any solidarity with the rest of the oppressed.

We are already seeing how prejudice, ignorance, rabid consumerism and the idolization of wealth have taken over the gay community. Marriage equality is simply the first step towards isolating and radicalizing the politically active segments of the wider gay community, while giving corporations access to our plentiful disposable income. We are being assimilated into the very same system that recently condemned us to marginality, exclusion and violence, but many are too blinded by their own arrogance and prejudice in order to realize what's happening.

Sooner than we think, the gay community will be filled with Ernst Rhom types who will justify their support of neoliberal brutality and reactionary politics by saying that government protections impinge on their rights and that the markets should be unregulated in order to ensure that the economy doesn't collapse. Sadly, many gay men haven't learned anything from past oppression, and are too stupid to realize that we can become victims faster than you can say "I do".

Re: After gay marriage is the norm, will all gay white men become Republican?

Originally Posted by Adrusek81

Of course they will. Once homosexuality becomes "accepted", those who fit the mold of what society upholds as ideal, will have no reason to side with progressive issues. The power of WASP privilege should never be underestimated, and when people stop facing rejection from their coevals and start being seen as merely one more within a group of socially favoured individuals, many will see no reason for showing any solidarity with the rest of the oppressed.

We are already seeing how prejudice, ignorance, rabid consumerism and the idolization of wealth have taken over the gay community. Marriage equality is simply the first step towards isolating and radicalizing the politically active segments of the wider gay community, while giving corporations access to our plentiful disposable income. We are being assimilated into the very same system that recently condemned us to marginality, exclusion and violence, but many are too blinded by their own arrogance and prejudice in order to realize what's happening.

Sooner than we think, the gay community will be filled with Ernst Rhom types who will justify their support of neoliberal brutality and reactionary politics by saying that government protections impinge on their rights and that the markets should be unregulated in order to ensure that the economy doesn't collapse. Sadly, many gay men haven't learned anything from past oppression, and are too stupid to realize that we can become victims faster than you can say "I do".

I don't agree. Gay men tend to be smarter and better educated than the population as a whole. Smarter, more educated people are more likely to be Republican. Add to that a history of oppression and there is no reason to think gay, white men will behave that differently than Jews, who are also smarter and more educated than the population as a whole and continue to vote consistently for Democrats.